The Derek Chauvin / George Floyd Trial

[s0me0nesmind1]

Indeed, I wonder who are you talking to. I have already concluded that Chavuin actually did murder in the first degree but he'll never put those thoughts on the record.

Don't debate ghosts. Don't disrespect people with irrationality. I'm not quite wired normally and find this type of response far more offensive than curse words other sorts of anger expression.

He's one of the many nutcases. You can't discuss anything from a neutral or court jury stand point.

His view is always frothing at the mouth yelling Racist! Murder! Every black man is innocent and every cop is a racist!

 

[NWRMidnight]

He's one of the many nutcases. You can't discuss anything from a neutral or court jury stand point.

His view is always frothing at the mouth yelling Racist! Murder! Every black man is innocent and every cop is a racist!

What an interesting response coming from a person who never discusses anything from a neutral position and makes multiple excuses and/or defends blatant acts of racism. You seem to walk thru life with blinders on while taking bits and pieces of events, and in most cases manipulating those events to form some alternate reality that is not the truth. Which is exactly what you did here, as nobody has claimed every black man is innocent and every cop is racist. In short, you are a champion of falsehoods.

 

[pcgeek11]

PCgeek really good at Republican dog whistle speak.

Republicans: Those urban people are looting and burning down our cities
Republicans: I never said black

Everyone knows in the context of the George Floyd trial when righties referring to angry looters burning down our cities" they mean predominantly black people.

Turns out the geeskter is good at playing dumb too

I saw a whole lot of "whities" at those riots and protests....

 

[pcgeek11]

And I explained why we still think it is racist, then I predicted what you would do if I was right, and you did exactly that.
Notice how you still haven not given any explanation, and instead is arguing that because you never said it out loud we can't blame you on being racist.

Right. You got me pegged. /s

I have to say what I mean to meet your exact specifications or it must mean I am a racist. LOL

 

[SMOGZINN]

Right. You got me pegged. /s

I have to say what I mean to meet your exact specifications or it must mean I am a racist. LOL

All you have to do is give a non-racist explanation for your reasoning. Something you have spent a lot of time avoiding doing.
I have detailed why we think it is racist, and told you how you can change our minds, but instead of just explaining yourself you are trying to frame yourself as the victim.

 

[HomerJS]

He's one of the many nutcases. You can't discuss anything from a neutral or court jury stand point.

His view is always frothing at the mouth yelling Racist! Murder! Every black man is innocent and every cop is a racist!

Aren't you the guy criticizing celebrities but used one when it suited your warped agenda?

BTW - What did Neera Tanden do that was corrupt?

 

[BoomerD]

I think he should be convicted and serve lots of time. There was no need to knee his neck and certainly not for 9 minutes. He was subdued and handcuffed. Lay him down and call for transport, all he could do is flop around.

I'm not so sure about what extent he should be convicted of. I don't think he intended to kill Mr Floyd, but did intend to harm him.

I also believe no matter the sentence or conviction it will not be enough to satisfy the mob rioters who will be back out in full force. I hope not, but I don't have much faith in any peaceful end.

IANAL, but the way I read the Minnesota statutes, Chauvin, at the most, should be charged with Murder in the Third degree or Manslaughter in the First degree.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609

 

[SMOGZINN]

IANAL, but the way I read the Minnesota statutes, Chauvin, at the most, should be charged with Murder in the Third degree or Manslaughter in the First degree.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609

I disagree, by my readings of those same codes I think he is guilty of Murder in the Second Degree and I could make an argument for Murder in the First Degree.

It really comes down to what you believe his goal was in keeping pressure against his neck for that long. I have a really, really hard time believing that he didn't know that death or serious brain injury was the likely outcome of his actions. Every time he was told to let up a bit to let him recover he refused, even after Floyd was obviously unconscious. That tells me he wanted to make sure he was dead.

 

[Torn Mind]

Interesting that the pills tested had only 1.9 to 2.9 percent of meth present in those pills. The last witness stated she normally saw 92-100% in such pills.

The very low percentage of fentanyl was normal, according to her.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Interesting that the pills tested had only 1.9 to 2.9 percent of meth present in those pills. The last witness stated she normally saw 92-100% in such pills.

The very low percentage of fentanyl was normal, according to her.

I'll take Red herring for $2000, Alex.

Not a dig against you - it has no bearing on Floyd's death.

 

[Torn Mind]

I'll take Red herring for $2000, Alex.

Not a dig against you - it has no bearing on Floyd's death.

Can't be a red herring when those are simply answers provided by the last witness to take the stand...and the defense lawyer did not even cross-examine her.

It probably helps the prosecution. The jury is less likely to get swayed by the overdose narrative if the amount of meth sounds so low. The rest of the expert testimony will matter though.

If Floyd was overdosing, the cops still had the obligation to remedy the situation with naloxone.

 

[pcgeek11]

All you have to do is give a non-racist explanation for your reasoning. Something you have spent a lot of time avoiding doing.
I have detailed why we think it is racist, and told you how you can change our minds, but instead of just explaining yourself you are trying to frame yourself as the victim.

I am no victim. I don't really care what You Think. I explained what I said, you just don't accept it, Fine by me. I don't need your approval or acceptance.

Black and white people were protesting and rioting before and it will probably be the same after the trial. I hope not, but the odds are not good.

 

[Vic]

What the joke this is watching so-called freedom-loving small govt conservatives rationalize why the govt should be able to extrajudicially murder citizens on the streets, and desperately hoping the govt agents who clearly abused their powers get away with it even though the world watched it on video. Just a fucking joke.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Can't be a red herring when those are simply answers provided by the last witness to take the stand...and the defense lawyer did not even cross-examine her.

It probably helps the prosecution. The jury is less likely to get swayed by the overdose narrative if the amount of meth sounds so low. The rest of the expert testimony will matter though.

If Floyd was overdosing, the cops still had the obligation to remedy the situation with naloxone.

The whole "he was on drugs" has no bearing to the case. It wasn't the drugs that caused his death, it was the actions of the police officer. Yes, I know the defense is trying to say the drugs was the contributing factor, but that's bullshit. it was the 9+ minutes of pressure on his neck, as well as the multiple disregards to not only Floyd's pleads, but to that of the crowd, and the 2+ minute delay when the paramedics got there to get off him.

Look at it from another angle: Lets say Floyd was jogging/running. The police stopped him, while he was trying to catch his breath, arrested him, and the same events played out with the 9+ minutes of pressure on his neck with the same results his death.. would the defense or anyone else be trying to argue that it was the jogging that was the contributing factor? This whole "he was high, he was on fentanyl" is distraction and a cover up of the truth that he was out right murdered by this cop.

 

[Torn Mind]

The whole "he was on drugs" has no bearing to the case. It wasn't the drugs that caused his death, it was the actions of the police officer. Yes, I know the defense is trying to say the drugs was the contributing factor, but that's bullshit. it was the 9+ minutes of pressure on his neck, as well as the multiple disregards to not only Floyd's pleads, but to that of the crowd, and the 2+ minute delay when the paramedics got there to get off him.

Look at it from another angle: Lets say Floyd was jogging/running. The police stopped him, while he was trying to catch his breath, arrested him, and the same events played out with the 9+ minutes of pressure on his neck with the same results his death.. would the defense or anyone else be trying to argue that it was the jogging that was the contributing factor? This whole "he was high, he was on fentanyl" is distraction and a cover up of the truth that he was out right murdered by this cop.

A properly irrelevant point is one in which the truth value does not matter. If I aim to prove(or disprove) that I woke up in the morning, anyone (including myself as Devil's advocate) saying that the neighbor's dog pooped OR did not poop will not complete the syllogism. The judge would not allow either side to bring up witnesses in court.

The truth value of the assertion that drugs killed George Floyd absolutely matters as it is the difference between murder and not murder. To obtain the proof of murder , it must be proven false that Floyd did not overdose or have the drugs he ingested kill him.

Irrelevance is not falsehood. You have attempted to prove falsehood, not irrelevance. Even in the matter of jogging, there are corner cases to consider, such as if the jogger has a psychological ailment and thus work out to an extreme level.

The testimony today basically confirmed my initial and careful diagnosis. No signs overdose. If he was high, it was not much. Floyd could have been lying about his initial "I can't breath". The cop certainly saw that as an opportunity as an opportunity to use Floyd's willingness to exploit the system against Floyd.

Derek Chauvin however, did not quite fully see the landscape and has a sufficiently brazen belief his own behavior was justified. The Mr. Tobin would basically put a heavy bombardment on the defense is something he had not seen coming.

Only a fool would think a cop ever initially acts out of the goodness of his/her heart. They can and will cook up bullshit if there is a "logical" weakness in the situation.

For the Minneapolis police, this situation is actual trangression #2 in just a few years. Justine Damond was offed only a few years ago.

 

[nickqt]

A properly irrelevant point is one in which the truth value does not matter. If I aim to prove(or disprove) that I woke up in the morning, anyone (including myself as Devil's advocate) saying that the neighbor's dog pooped OR did not poop will not complete the syllogism. The judge would not allow either side to bring up witnesses in court.

The truth value of the assertion that drugs killed George Floyd absolutely matters as it is the difference between murder and not murder. To obtain the proof of murder , it must be proven false that Floyd did not overdose or have the drugs he ingested kill him.

Irrelevance is not falsehood. You have attempted to prove falsehood, not irrelevance. Even in the matter of jogging, there are corner cases to consider, such as if the jogger has a psychological ailment and thus work out to an extreme level.

The testimony today basically confirmed my initial and careful diagnosis. No signs overdose. If he was high, it was not much. Floyd could have been lying about his initial "I can't breath". The cop certainly saw that as an opportunity as an opportunity to use Floyd's willingness to exploit the system against Floyd.

Derek Chauvin however, did not quite fully see the landscape and has a sufficiently brazen belief his own behavior was justified. The Mr. Tobin would basically put a heavy bombardment on the defense is something he had not seen coming.

Only a fool would think a cop ever initially acts out of the goodness of his/her heart. They can and will cook up bullshit if there is a "logical" weakness in the situation.

For the Minneapolis police, this situation is actual trangression #2 in just a few years. Justine Damond was offed only a few years ago.

Perhaps George Floyd overdosed because of the fucking knee pressing on his neck for close to 10 minutes.

Dog shit indeed.

 

[woolfe9998]

The whole "he was on drugs" has no bearing to the case. It wasn't the drugs that caused his death, it was the actions of the police officer. Yes, I know the defense is trying to say the drugs was the contributing factor, but that's bullshit. it was the 9+ minutes of pressure on his neck, as well as the multiple disregards to not only Floyd's pleads, but to that of the crowd, and the 2+ minute delay when the paramedics got there to get off him.

Look at it from another angle: Lets say Floyd was jogging/running. The police stopped him, while he was trying to catch his breath, arrested him, and the same events played out with the 9+ minutes of pressure on his neck with the same results his death.. would the defense or anyone else be trying to argue that it was the jogging that was the contributing factor? This whole "he was high, he was on fentanyl" is distraction and a cover up of the truth that he was out right murdered by this cop.

Yes, and the thing is, even IF the drugs were one necessary condition, while the conduct of the police was another, they are still guilty, of manslaughter at a minimum. Another factor contributing does not exonerate them under the law. Which is why I highly doubt that defense will work.

 

[Torn Mind]

Perhaps George Floyd overdosed because of the fucking knee pressing on his neck for close to 10 minutes.

Dog shit indeed.

I don't think anything I wrote supported the overdose myth.

 

[Torn Mind]

Yes, and the thing is, even IF the drugs were one necessary condition, while the conduct of the police was another, they are still guilty, of manslaughter at a minimum. Another factor contributing does not exonerate them under the law. Which is why I highly doubt that defense will work.

The weasel Chauvin probably already knows that and thought that he'd get it no worse than fellow cop Mohamed Noor. Throw in some good behavior credits, and he'd be out in less than the decade-long sentence if he winds up being convicted in the same way as Noor.

 

[NWRMidnight]

A properly irrelevant point is one in which the truth value does not matter. If I aim to prove(or disprove) that I woke up in the morning, anyone (including myself as Devil's advocate) saying that the neighbor's dog pooped OR did not poop will not complete the syllogism. The judge would not allow either side to bring up witnesses in court.

The truth value of the assertion that drugs killed George Floyd absolutely matters as it is the difference between murder and not murder. To obtain the proof of murder , it must be proven false that Floyd did not overdose or have the drugs he ingested kill him.

Irrelevance is not falsehood. You have attempted to prove falsehood, not irrelevance. Even in the matter of jogging, there are corner cases to consider, such as if the jogger has a psychological ailment and thus work out to an extreme level.

The testimony today basically confirmed my initial and careful diagnosis. No signs overdose. If he was high, it was not much. Floyd could have been lying about his initial "I can't breath". The cop certainly saw that as an opportunity as an opportunity to use Floyd's willingness to exploit the system against Floyd.

Derek Chauvin however, did not quite fully see the landscape and has a sufficiently brazen belief his own behavior was justified. The Mr. Tobin would basically put a heavy bombardment on the defense is something he had not seen coming.

Only a fool would think a cop ever initially acts out of the goodness of his/her heart. They can and will cook up bullshit if there is a "logical" weakness in the situation.

For the Minneapolis police, this situation is actual trangression #2 in just a few years. Justine Damond was offed only a few years ago.

Drugs didn't kill Floyd, The actions of the police officer killed him, which is why it's irrelevant. But you can't comprehend that so you go off on some twisted tangent.

If you are high, and I choke the shit out of you, causing your death; is it the drugs that killed you or my actions where I choked the shit out of you? Are the drugs relevant.. hell no! Your actions are the only thing relevant.

If I have a weak heart, and you shoot my ass dead, was it my weak heart that killed me or was it the gun shot that killed me? Sure as hell wasn't my heart that caused my death.

You can dance around all you want, act all smart when in fact you look like a dumbass, what ever floats your boat, but Whether Floyd was on drugs or not is irrelevant to his death, and as I already stated it is just an excuse to cover up the fact that he was murdered by those cops actions, not by him being on drugs. That is not a falsehood.

The real determining factor if it is murder or manslaughter is intent (was the death intended, or was death not intended meaning that his death was accidental and not with malice aforethought). The fact that they didn't follow protocol, ignored his pleads, ignored the crowds pleads, basically ignored the paramedics for 2+ minutes after their arrival, and didn't get off him even after he became unresponsive, indicates death was intended which is murder.

 

[Torn Mind]

Drugs didn't kill Floyd, The actions of the police officer killed him, which is why it's irrelevant. But you can't comprehend that.
I never attempted to prove any falsehood. So why lie and twist it into something else?

In all honesty, you are just babbling like you are a scholar on the subject, acting like you know what you are talking about when in fact, you are stupid as a rock and everyone knows it but you.

Floyd not being killed by drugs is essential to proving a murder occurred. I'll have a much more bloodthirsty response later but let this one salivate in your mind a little.

 

[Vic]

Floyd not being killed by drugs is essential to proving a murder occurred. I'll have a much more bloodthirsty response later but let this one salivate in your mind a little.

Have you considered that some might be upset that the very idea that Floyd may have been killed by drugs is even in consideration here when the actual cause of death is so evident? It's not normal legal procedure to have to rule out every possible cause of death when the actual cause of death is not in doubt to a reasonable person.

 

[Torn Mind]

Drugs didn't kill Floyd, The actions of the police officer killed him, which is why it's irrelevant. But you can't comprehend that so you go off on some twisted tangent.

If you are high, and I choke the shit out of you, causing your death; is it the drugs that killed you or my actions where I choked the shit out of you? Are the drugs relevant.. hell no! Your actions are the only thing relevant.

If I have a weak heart, and you shoot my ass dead, was it my weak heart that killed me or was it the gun shot that killed me? Sure as hell wasn't my heart that caused my death.

You can dance around all you want, act all smart when in fact you look like a dumbass, what ever floats your boat, but Whether Floyd was on drugs or not is irrelevant to his death, and as I already stated it is just an excuse to cover up the fact that he was murdered by those cops actions, not by him being on drugs. That is not a falsehood.

The real determining factor if it is murder or manslaughter is intent (was the death intended, or was death not intended meaning that his death was accidental and not with malice aforethought). The fact that they didn't follow protocol, ignored his pleads, ignored the crowds pleads, basically ignored the paramedics for 2+ minutes after their arrival, and didn't get off him even after he became unresponsive, indicates death was intended which is murder.

Don't say "no bearing to the case." when you actually mean something else, mostly like "no relevant physiological cause". Because trial cases involves proving and disproving things, along with persuading a judge/jury. Fundamental to proofs in law is rudimentary logic.

I read you statement fairly and accurately and debated under the presumption that you were rationally disputing relevance to the case.

You are confuddling two things.

There is matter of Floyd not being killed by drugs, which there is no dispute. The matter of physiological cause, I am in agreement with. Floyd was alive and well, full grasp of senses.

The FALSEHOOD I was referring to was "George Floyd WAS KILLED BY DRUGS". That's the falsehood.

The matter of whether it is irrelevant. Perhaps you meant irrelevant to the actual cause. My conception of irrrelevant is to the case.
If someone did kill me by choking and he/she knew I was high. What's usually going to happen when they try to explain it to friends, police, other people involved? That my drugs did it and not them. Who will speak for me when I cannot since I'm dead? Oh right, the lawyers, experts, etc who have to look at what evidence is left in my body. Plus the people in the public all playing armchair doctor, some of whom who scream FAKE NEWS and blindly think I DID overdose. Well, I'm not that famous so I'd probalby trigger a mere police investigation and then they see strangulation marks.

There is the situation where someone could be having a drug reaction and the officer simply doesn't give the remedy because he didn't feel like it.

Regarding your personal attack, the one thing I will never do is think of myself as smart. It's the first step to being blinded, beaten, and defeated. Delusion is the one drug I can live without. Give me pain and reality. I welcome it. Always learn from others, even those who antagonize you.

 

[Torn Mind]

Have you considered that some might be upset that the very idea that Floyd may have been killed by drugs is even in consideration here when the actual cause of death is so evident? It's not normal legal procedure to have to rule out every possible cause of death when the actual cause of death is not in doubt to a reasonable person.

You think I don't know cops are pieces of shit? Hell, I might even say they should have their organs "donated" after death if they really want to prove they want to help the "community" and aren't in it for the privilege and prestige.

I've been fucked over by the police since childhood, not directly though. When fucking cops refuse to investigate and outright deny that sexual abuse occurred to my sister even though medical experts had documented abnormal hymen damage, that's something that sunk in because I would have been that victim if I didn't have a Y chromosome.

But while I can be emotional, I know damn well going into a tizzy against cops is ultimately self-destructive. They are going to hunt for some gap that they can exploit and fuck you over with and you damn better face the reality that they normally get away with it. I surmise they ignored my sister because at that time, my mom's English was poor and she didn't have much money. Plus there was a divorce going on. Meanwhile, Dad had status, resources. And possibly, the cop had a relationship with some female in Dad's law firm.

Floyd killed by drugs is wretched myth and I spent time on Youtube trying to bust. You want proof, I'll show such a convo and my Youtube handle.

 

[NWRMidnight]

Floyd not being killed by drugs is essential to proving a murder occurred. I'll have a much more bloodthirsty response later but let this one salivate in your mind a little.

First, I edited my response, as my original one wasn't very nice (the one you quoted), I pretty much completely changed it. But to your response here:

Bullshit! He didn't just fall over and die. He died at the hands of those police as they ignored every opportunity and plead to give him medical help., along with using improper procedures/restraint techniques, etc. (the list is long).

It seems you need to go learn what murder and manslaughter are. They all revolve around intent, or rather whether the death happened with or without malice and aforethought. Those police officers actions, specifically Derek Chauvin's actions is what will determine if it was with or without malice (read my edit above, specifically the last paragraph).

The only way his drug use would be relevant is if Derek accidently unknowingly stood on his neck for 9+ minutes, accidently and unknowingly ignored all the pleads from both Floyd and the crowed, accidently and unknowingly ignored the paramedics for 2+ minutes........ ah hell, this is just getting stupid because Floyd's drug use has zero to do with any of that.. Derek's actions has to be justified before Floyd's Drug use even remotely scratches the surface of relevant.